Species at Risk results-based management, accountability and audit framework: chapter 3
The results logic outlined in this section focuses on the "how, who, what and why" of species at risk protection and recovery. The "why" of the SAR Program refers to the long-term expected benefits to the environment, Canadians and the economy. The rationale for the Program is addressed by the Program context and objectives (sections 2.1 and 2.2). The intermediate and immediate outcomes can be described by "what" we would expect to see happen and to / by "whom" (Program partners, Aboriginal people and stakeholders) as indicators of progress towards the long-term outcomes. "How" refers to the operational aspects or activities required to meet the program objectives (see Section 3.1) and encompasses those activities and outputs that are under direct control of the core departments.
A logic model is a graphical illustration of the links among the "how, who, what and why" of a program and shows the declining levels of influence of the core departments moving from activities through to long-term impacts.
To accommodate the range of activities and complexity of the SAR Program, four logic models have been developed (figures 2 to 5).
Activities refer to the internal operations or work process of the core departments responsible for delivering on species at risk, and outputs refer to the resulting deliverables (products and/or services). Activities are the first link in the chain through which outcomes are achieved.
The key activities and outputs are summarized in Table 1010.
Immediate outcomes refer to the impact of the core departments’ activities on those directly reached by and involved with the federal SAR Program and its activities (e.g., Program partners and Aboriginal people). Immediate outcomes of the program include increased engagement and co-operation on SAR Program delivery, alignment of F/P/T policies and programs, enhanced Aboriginal capacity on SAR conservation, and measures to protect species at risk. The core departments do not control these impacts but have a reasonable degree of influence on the outcomes.
Intermediate outcomes can be a consequence of a single immediate outcome or can result from the contribution of a number of immediate outcomes. The program’s intermediate outcomes will be seen in the SAR Program stakeholder groups (e.g., ENGOs, industry, private landowners, land managers, individual Canadians) in terms of increased awareness, capacity, and actions to protect species at risk and their habitat.
The expected immediate and intermediate outcomes are shown in Table 11.
The final (long-term) outcome is the ultimate rationale for SARA implementation and responds to the question of why the Accord and the Act were developed. The final outcome is
- Conservation and protection of Canada’s species at risk.
The links between activities and outputs and outcomes are illustrated in the following four logic models (see figures 2 through 5).
The first two elements of the SAR Conservation Cycle (i.e., Assessment and Protection) are represented in one logic model. While the assessment process is managed independently from the protection activity, there are a number of significant links between the two in terms of activities, outputs and expected outcomes. Each of the other three elements (i.e., Recovery Planning, Implementation, which includes Compliance Promotion and Enforcement and Monitoring and Evaluation is presented separately. The final outcome is shared by all elements of the SAR Program.
Figure 2: Results-based Logic Model for Species at Risk Assessment and Protection
Figure 3: Results-based Logic Model for Species at Risk Recovery Planning
Figure 4: Results-based Logic Model for Species at Risk Implementation
Figure 5: Results-based Logic Model for Species at Risk Monitoring and Evaluation
10 More information on SAR Program activities overall can be found in Section 2.
Report a problem or mistake on this page
- Date modified: